About Me

Known principally for his weekly political columns and his commentaries on radio and television, Chris Trotter has spent most of his adult life either engaging in or writing about politics. He was the founding editor of The New Zealand Political Review (1992-2005) and in 2007 authored No Left Turn, a political history of New Zealand. Living in Auckland with his wife and daughter, Chris describes himself as an “Old New Zealander” – i.e. someone who remembers what the country was like before Rogernomics. He has created this blog as an archive for his published work and an outlet for his more elegiac musings. It takes its name from Bowalley Road, which runs past the North Otago farm where he spent the first nine years of his life. Enjoy.

Bowalley Road Rules

The blogosphere tends to be a very noisy, and all-too-often a very abusive, place. I intend Bowalley Road to be a much quieter, and certainly a more respectful, place.So, if you wish your comments to survive the moderation process, you will have to follow the Bowalley Road Rules.These are based on two very simple principles:Courtesy and Respect.Comments which are defamatory, vituperative, snide or hurtful will be removed, and the commentators responsible permanently banned.Anonymous comments will not be published. Real names are preferred. If this is not possible, however, commentators are asked to use a consistent pseudonym.Comments which are thoughtful, witty, creative and stimulating will be most welcome, becoming a permanent part of the Bowalley Road discourse.However, I do add this warning. If the blog seems in danger of being over-run by the usual far-Right suspects, I reserve the right to simply disable the Comments function, and will keep it that way until the perpetrators find somewhere more appropriate to vent their collective spleen.

Followers

Tuesday, 16 July 2013

Coups, And Rumours Of Coups

Tweet Surrender: Paradoxically, Duncan Garner's use of Twitter to announce a move against the leadership of David Shearer may, by alerting his supporters, have caused its organisers to hastily abort whatever it was they were trying to achieve. Or, the former TV3 political editor may simply have been played.

DUNCAN GARNER has been roundly criticised this week for
falsely predicting the imminent resignation of Labour leader, David Shearer.
Comparisons have been drawn between Mr Garner’s infamous “tweet” and the media
tactics used to bring down the Australian Labor Prime Minister, Julia Gillard.
Questions are now being raised about the ethics of journalists and commentators
becoming players in a game they’re only supposed to watch.

All of which is the purest humbug. Politicians and journalists
have always lived out of each other’s pockets. This is because politics isn’t
just about the use of power; it’s also about how the use of power is explained
and justified.

The truly effective politician leaves as little of that task to journalists
as possible. There wasn’t a lot more that a journalist could have added to
Abraham Lincoln’s Gettysburg Address, or Winston Churchill’s “Finest Hour”
speech. Nor could Kiwi scribes much improve upon David Lange’s crushing
dismissal of Sir Robert Muldoon’s interventionism: “You can’t run a country
like a Polish shipyard!”

Not all politicians are, however, blessed with such
memorable rhetorical skills. For those who struggle to explain and/or justify
their political actions, a measure of journalistic assistance is usually required.

We have learned to call these people “spin doctors”. It’s an
evocative title, recalling those legendary spin bowlers who could turn a
cricket ball in whatever direction they pleased. The reality, however, is that
nearly all spin doctors have, at one time or another, been senior political
journalists.

As such, they have a fairly shrewd idea of who it is among
their former colleagues that should be called in for an interview – and who
should be kept as far away from their bosses as possible. As skilled
journalists they can also spot the weaknesses and strengths in the stories that
are written about their employers.

The environment in which politicians and journalists move
is, therefore, one of both familiarity and contempt. Only the very best
performers, on either side, have no need for the back-scratching of the other.

Stories are leaked. Rumours are started. Judgements are made
– or encouraged. Politicians and journalists constantly use each other – not
only to build themselves up, but also to tear down their colleagues (who are
more often than not their competitors and rivals).

Which brings us back to Mr Garner and his tweet.

Labour MPs have accused Mr Garner of “making up” his story
about a coup being underway against Mr Shearer. But only a moment’s thought is
required to expose this accusation for the nonsense it is.

Mr Garner has confirmed that his informant was a member of
the Labour Party Caucus. Presumably, he or she was someone who had vouchsafed
information to Mr Garner in the past – information which had proved to be
reliable.

The maelstrom of criticism into which Mr Garner has been unceremoniously
pitched, since his predictions of last Thursday night were proved wrong,
provides the strongest argument as to why he would not have tweeted without
feeling extremely confident about the rumour’s veracity. (Just to make sure,
however, he sought and received confirmation from a second Labour Party source.)

That Mr Garner was given what the Americans call “a
bum steer” should tell him (and us) that the atmosphere in Labour’s Caucus is
becoming increasingly toxic. And, as Julia Gillard would no doubt confirm, such
a poisoned political environment makes rumours of an imminent leadership spill both
inevitable and believable.

1) Some sort of leadership coup was on, but Mr Garner’s
tweet alerted Mr Shearer’s supporters and the organisers were forced to abort.
(Despairing Labour MPs may simply have been gathering sufficient signatures to
persuade their leader to go gracefully and preserve the party from a
debilitating civil war.)

2) No coup was imminent, but Mr Garner’s source considered
it vital that Mr Shearer be forced to endure yet another destabilising round of
media speculation concerning the viability of his leadership. (So vital that
they were willing to abuse and lose Mr Garner’s trust.)

3) For reasons of their own, Mr Shearer’s backers decided to
undermine Mr Garner’s journalistic credibility by deliberately misinforming him
that a coup was underway.

Each of these explanations offers a slightly different take
on the dire state of affairs within the Labour Caucus. Underlying all of them,
however, is the undeniable fact of a leader (and the faction backing that
leader) under extraordinary and unremitting pressure.

Mr Garner’s prediction may have failed to materialise, but
it did, at least, remind us of Bismarck’s famous quip: “Never believe anything
in politics until it has been officially denied.”

This essay was
originally published in The Press of Tuesday,
16 July 2013.

6 comments:

Anonymous
said...

And you are one of those unashamedly putting him under that pressure. Not that I care that much, Labour has got a long way to go to counter that "there all as bad as each other" feeling many of us have these days.

Of course another theory could have been that Duncan just made the whole thing up, certainly that is what some from the Left are claiming but how likely is that as it leads to a complete lack of creditability

Or by talking up a coup it would happenAgain not very likely, possibly he was gamed by the Labour insider but for what point

@ Anonymous (6:25 PM) - Shearer's principal error was not to check in his ego at the door when he was approached to be leader of the party, which was a bit like asking a burger flipper to take over as head chef for a royal banquet at the Dorchester.

While this isn't so much my battle - Labour has shed too many of its values to hold any attraction for me - I want a strong and credible opposition because democracies do best when those in the treasury seats not only can't act with impunity but are fearful of even contemplating doing it. Looking at National's actions over the past 18 months and both Labour and Mr Shearer's woeful polling, I suspect Key and his caucus aren't feeling much anxiety let alone fear.

An unknown actor with ambitions grander by far than his abilities and modest experience should encourage fails to turn up for an audition but is cast in the lead role of a multi-million dollar Hollywood epic anyway...

"Mr Garner’s prediction may have failed to materialise, but it did, at least, remind us of Bismarck’s famous quip: “Never believe anything in politics until it has been officially denied.”"

Bismarck was an arch conservative and a ruthless operator with a great calculating mind. He had blood on his hands, having allowed certain strategic wars, but yes, he knew also what politics is all about.

As for Labour and Shearer, no way would anyone in the caucus seriously have dared to misinform Garner to create such instability, they are all too scared to rock the boat which could cost them their seat or rankings. Others may destroy all later prospects.

No, I am sure, Garner has a source, but as senior caucus members were alerted by tweets, they swiftly joined ranks and ensured that all is stopped. The ones that were scheming realised they did not have the numbers, and then they did not want a public civil war inside.

Shearer though is now as weak and lonely as he has ever been before. There is no true loyalty, apart from perhaps a handful. He is going to be out soon. The challengers need to realign and widen the prospective support base, possibly making some deals. It will happen, I am sure, very soon.

The journalists though have over the last then years got more ruthless and lost their credibilities. That is not all, but most. Many do not even call themselves journalists anymore, they now are "media personalities", "commenters" or whatever. Such ones as Garner pipe up with their personal opinions all the time, same as Sean Plunket, Mike Hosking, Leighton Smith, Marcus Lush, Espiner, and the list goes on.

There once used to be a kind of "code of conduct", to at least attempt to report and moderate neutrally, but that does only exist in remnants of the media, like National Radio.

Particularly private media are now totally biased, and they of course do favour their poltical buddies of whatever party and groupings. So much for democracy. We get little information, no investigative journalism, biased, often totally deficient reporting, hence uninformed voters. Only objectively, well informed, mature citizens as voters can ensure a functioning democratic society.

In New Zealand, like many other countries (strangely predominantly Anglo Saxon ones) that is no longer. By the way NZ has the worst public broadcasting system in the developed world, only a skeleton of it.

Anonymous.. where have you been? For decades and decades ...as long as there have been newspapers, journalists as you put it 'pipe up with their opinions.' Your comment is to put it politely incredibly naïve in the extreme.